[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9e4733910810300940w22786f2ate63cc828c1e66f9d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:40:44 -0400
From: "Jon Smirl" <jonsmirl@...il.com>
To: "Jonas Bonn" <jonas.bonn@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] API for system clocks (oscillators)
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Jonas Bonn <jonas.bonn@...il.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> How does this compare to the framework in linux/include/linux/clk.h?
>>>
>>
>> clk.h is pretty much just an infrastructure for "storing" clock data
>> and accessors... it does not provide:
>>
>> i) Constraints on selectable frequencies of active devices
>> ii) Notifiers on frequency change, including changes due to events
>> such as reparenting
>>
>> These are the big ones that cause headaches. When I want to switch
>> frequency, I have to check elsewhere which devices are active and
>> which frequencies they allow. When a frequency changes, I have to
>> manually make sure that the active devices are notified properly of
>> the change. These are the main things that my document tries to
>> consolidate into one framework. Like I said, I'm not sure it's the
>> right approach, that's why I requested feedback...
>
> You could probably work those features into the existing clk framework.
> clk_set_rate() could compute the constrains and return an error.
> The API could be expanded with notifier support.
BTW, most user of the clk framework are on ARM.
>
> --
> Jon Smirl
> jonsmirl@...il.com
>
--
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@...il.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists